Robinson v. City of Middletown Police Department et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER ROBINSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
ADDISON GATES, et al.,
Defendants.
Civil Action 1:24-cv-286
Judge Michael R. Barrett
Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the undersigned for a Report and Recommendation on the Court’s
January 2, 2026 Show Cause Order (ECF No. 57). For the reasons that follow, it is
RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Addison Gates be DISMISSED
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
The docket reflects that Defendant Addison Gates was served with the Amended
Complaint on November 28, 2025, making his answer due December 19, 2025. (ECF No. 55.)
To date, Gates has not filed an answer or other responsive pleading. Nor has Plaintiff applied for
and obtained an entry of default from the Clerk pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
55(a). On January 2, 2026, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why his claims against
Gates should not be dismissed for want of prosecution within fourteen days unless Plaintiff had
moved for entry of default against Gates in the interim. (ECF No. 57.)
Case: 1:24-cv-00286-MRB-CMV Doc #: 58 Filed: 01/22/26 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the Show Cause Order and has not moved for
entry of default. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant
Addison Gates be DISMISSED pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS
If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen
(14) days of the date of this Report, file and serve on all parties written objections to those
specific proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made, together with
supporting authority for the objection(s). A District Judge of this Court shall make a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report or specified proposed findings or recommendations
to which objection is made. Upon proper objections, a District Judge of this Court may accept,
reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made herein, may receive
further evidence or may recommit this matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and
Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to have the District Judge review the Report
and Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of
the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140
(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
/s/ Chelsey M. Vascura
CHELSEY M. VASCURA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case: 1:24-cv-00286-MRB-CMV Doc #: 58 Filed: 01/22/26 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>